Disposed

Raman v. the Deputy Superintendent of

Madras HC3 Jun 2016CRL OP/11358/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the first respondent Police not to harass the petitioner based on the second respondent's complaint. The petitioner must cooperate with the enquiry. If a cognizable offence emerges and an FIR is registered, the petitioner will not be allowed to shelter in this order.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Police not to harass the petitioner; petitioner directed to cooperate with the pending enquiry.

Raman Vs the Deputy Superintendent of — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 03.06.2016

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.11358 of 2016

¶6

1.Raman
2.Kali
3.Govindasamy .. Petitioners
Vs.
1.The State, Rep. by
The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
District Crime Branch,
(Land Grabbing Special Wing)
Vellore, Vellore District.
2.Joseph .. Respondents

¶7

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to direct the first respondent not to harass the petitioners on the basis of the false complaint received from the 2^nd proposed respondent without conducting proper enquiry.

¶8

For Petitioner :: Mr.E.Kannadasan For Respondent-1:: Mr.C.Emalias Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R

¶9

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed praying to direct the first respondent not to harass the petitioner on the basis of the complaint given by the second respondent.

¶10

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent and perused the materials placed on record.

¶11

It is represented by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that on a complaint given by one Joseph, a petition enquiry is pending against the petitioner.

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

In view of the above, the respondent-Police is directed not to harass the petitioner. The petitioner shall co-operate in the enquiry. During the course of enquiry, if any cognizable offence is made out, the respondent-Police is free to register an FIR and this order shall not be a shield for the petitioner against arrest.

¶14

With the above observation, this Criminal Original Petition is closed.

¶15

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ds
To
1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
District Crime Branch,
(Land Grabbing Special Wing)
Vellore, Vellore District.
2.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+ 1 cc to M/s. E. Kannadasan, Advocate Sr.29688
Crl. O.P. No.11358 of 2016
RSI(CO)
Eu 16/6/16

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Raman v. the Deputy Superintendent of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raman v. the Deputy Superintendent of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Gnanakumar @ Babu Vs the Inspector of Police

C.K.Balasundaram Vs the Superintendent of Police

D.Vimalanathan Vs the Superintendent of Police

S.Kothandraraman Vs the Superintendent of Police

M.Balasubramaniam Vs State Rep. by

G. Krishnan, Vs the Commissioner of Police